| From: | Piotr Stefaniak <postgres(at)piotr-stefaniak(dot)me> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A couple of cosmetic changes around shared memory code |
| Date: | 2016-06-29 20:35:41 |
| Message-ID: | BLU437-SMTP973ADDED2D7F973EC070B9F2230@phx.gbl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-06-29 18:58, Robert Haas wrote:
> This code predates be7558162acc5578d0b2cf0c8d4c76b6076ce352, prior to
> which proc_exit(0) forced an immediate, unconditional restart. It's
> true that, given that commit, changing this code to do proc_exit(0)
> instead of proc_exit(1) would be harmless. However, people writing
> background workers that might need to work with 9.3 would be best
> advised to stick with proc_exit(1). Therefore, I maintain that this
> is not broken and doesn't need to be fixed.
Then I'd argue that it ought to be documented in form of a C comment for
people writing background workers and for those who might want to "fix"
this in the future.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-06-29 21:01:23 | Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-06-29 20:10:17 | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |